write a 5-8 page paper that satisfies the requirements of the original assignment but is additionally focused on the following:
Choose to specifically watch a PERSUASIVE speaker (one who’s goal it is to change how we think or act) rather than an informative or ceremonial.
Add to your paper an analysis of the evidence and reasoning of the speaker (remember persuasive speeches consist of arguments for a cause and arguments consist of a claim, backed up by evidence, and supported by reasoning).
Determine and identify the speaker’s overall persuasive purpose/(PROPOSITION)
Identify the persuasive CLAIMS that the speaker uses to persuade you of the overall purpose.
Identify some of the EVIDENCE that was used to support these CLAIMS by utilizing the 8 tests of evidence (found on Canvas)
Identify some of the REASONING that was used to connect the EVIDENCE to the CLAIMS.
What types of inductive reasoning did the speaker use? Reasoning by example, by cause, by analogy, by comparison, by authority, by sign?
Did the speaker create any deductive arguments (arguing from general conclusions to a specific claim – see textbook)?
Critique the evidence of the speaker by using the 8 Tests of Evidence paper found on Canvas to see if the speaker’s evidence passes all of these tests; and explaining when are where it fails.
Critique the reasoning of the speaker by using the 8 Fallacies paper found on Canvas to see if any of the reasoning of the speaker is flawed and s/he has created fallacious reasoning. Identify and explain any fallacies in their argument.
Finally, in your last paragraph of the assignment where you are to discuss the overall effectiveness of this speaker, review your critique of the speaker’s arguments and then offer some suggestions on how they might have better argued for their PROPOSITION. Please note this process is very similar to what you will be doing in the debates; here you will be offering it in written form instead of oral.
Worksheet to prepare Speech 101 Honors Speech Analysis Paper
Therefore, include in your paper the following:
PROPOSITION (overarching claim)
The speaker’s overarching claim/PROPOSITION is: ________________________________________
(example: that the death penalty should be abolished in the state of California)
The speaker’s overarching claim/PROPOSITION is focused on proving a: Fact, Value, or Policy?
(example: Policy)
CLAIMS
The speaker’s first claim to support the proposition is: ______________________________________
(example: that the death penalty is inhumane)
The speaker’s second claim to support the proposition is: ______________________________________
(example: that the death penalty is too costly)
The speaker’s third claim to support the proposition is: ______________________________________
(example: that the death penalty is racist)
EVIDENCE – proof
The speaker’s evidence for the first claim is:_________________________________________________
(example: the speaker said: “According to Wikipedia.com, the definition of inhumanity is that there is no hint of humanness in the decision that is being made.” (2024)
The speaker’s evidence for the second claim is:_______________________________________________
(example: the speaker said: “According to an article under California Cost Study 2011 on deathpenaltyinfo.org, death row inmates cost the state an additional 90,000 per year per inmate compared to regular prisoners.”)
The speaker’s evidence for the third claim is:_________________________________________________
(example: the speaker said: “According to an article titled “Arguments Against the Death Penalty” on ProCon.org, “People of color have accounted for a disproportionate 43% of total executions since 1976.” (2024)
EVIDENCE – Analysis
The evidence for the first claim does pass the Test of Evidence called:________ because_____________
(example: Fails the test of Reliability because Wikipedia is not considered a trustworthy source)
The evidence for the first claim does pass the Test of Evidence called:________ because_____________
(example: Fails the test of Recency because the study was from 2011)
The evidence for the first claim does pass the Test of Evidence called:________ because_____________
(example: Fails the test of Objectivity because the title of the article is arguments against the death penalty and upon further investigation the research was conducted by an organization called The World Coalition Against the Death Penalty which by name sounds very biased. We need an objective report of statistics).
REASONING – Types of
The intended reasoning in the first argument is ______________reasoning.
(example: deductive reasoning by enthymeme – see textbook)
The intended reasoning in the second argument is ______________reasoning.
(example: inductive reasoning by comparison)
The intended reasoning in the third argument is ______________reasoning.
(example: inductive reasoning by example)
REASONING – Analysis of
The reasoning in the first argument is a ________________ Fallacy because_______________________
(example: the reasoning is considered a Circular Fallacy because the speaker uses the term human in trying to define humanity, so the conclusion is assumed in one of the premises of the syllogism)
The reasoning in the second argument is a ______________ Fallacy because_______________________
(example: the reasoning is considered a Red Herring Fallacy because the speaker is arguing that cost should distract us from doing what is right and just. It is a diversionary tactic to take our attention away from the real facts that a highly dangerous person could be allowed to live because it is expensive to house them and execute them. The real problem is not cost of execution, it is the cost of housing these high security inmates and that cost could be dealt with in other ways than abandoning the death penalty
The reasoning in the third argument is a ________________ Fallacy because_______________________
(example: the reasoning is considered a Hasty Generalization fallacy because the speaker does not provide representative information nor enough information to prove that people of color are executed disproportionately. For instance, what is the percentage of the people of color population that are on death row for comparison? Further, what other factors weigh into the final execution that may be skewing this number but completely coincidental to skin color, e.g. degree of crime. Also, the numbers of executions here are not large enough to analyze statistically since only 13 people have actually been executed in CA since the death penalty was reinstated in 1977. Further there hasn’t been an execution here since 2006. We are a much more discrimination-conscious people today than we were when these executions were taking place so we can not judge today based on past practices).
Lastly, if you are not sure about the fallacy at play, just take a stab at it! Then make an argument for what you are claiming. Reason through it.
